Winchester 296 and Hodgdon H-110 (arguably the same) are great powders, pehaps the best, for "full-house" .357 Magnum loads with just about any weight bullet. Follow the directions and the only sign of excessive pressure will be the impressive report and the snubby trying to jump out of your hands. Don't go below published minimums with these powders.

alucard0822

June 24, 2007, 06:39 AM

I use 22gr (NO MORE AND NO LESS) of H110/W296 with an XTP with a medium crimp (make sure you do not get setback!!!) with a 1.60 OAL and win SP primers (for standard or magnum loads) out of a 4" 686 or 5.5" old vaquero. The boom and muzzle flash out of the 686 are very impressive to say the least, much more than my standard 44mag loads. The mushroomed look of the spent primers let you know you are near the limits of what they can hold, and as I don't shoot this load often, and when I do its less than 30 rounds, I always use cases fired once, for my peice of mind I know there are unlikely to be any catastrophic defects from manufacturing or cracking/splitting from wear. Just in case anyone didn't already know its not a good idea to fire this load in an airweight snubby, you are likely to be left holding an empty grip.

Hawk

June 24, 2007, 10:51 AM

Hunh. I recently started a thread wondering what one does when one manual's minimum load was higher than another's manual's maximum load and the powder manufacturer warns against going below published minimums.

Perhaps the phenomenon isn't as rare as I thought.
Looks like you don't have any safe starting load either. Good luck.

Personally, I just ignored Speer. Now that another case of battling manuals has appeared, maybe I'll just chuck it. The last time, Speer 12 and 13 were identical. Can anybody verify if updating to 13 would help with the 125 grain example?

Clark

June 24, 2007, 11:22 AM

There are old load books with H110/W296 loads for 38 special that certainly represent a reduced H110 load for 357 magnum.

I have experimented with reduced H110 loads, and I have found that a weak crimp and reduced H110 load can case a squib that puts a bullet half way in the forcing cone and half way in the cylinder. That failure really jams the gun, and would be disaster in a self defense situation.

I make serious roll crimps when I do H110 reduced loads, and I don't have a problem.

I emailed Hodgdon about reduced H110 loads and they said there is no detonation problem, just a stuck bullet problem.

I'm currently loading 18.5 grains of 296 behind a 125 grain Rem. SJHP. I have chrono'd this load out of my 4" taurus tracker at 1400 fps.:D I'm happy with this, its a good load, winchester small pistol magnum primers required.

ArchAngelCD

June 24, 2007, 11:17 PM

I use W296 and H110 for my .357 Magnum rounds along with either a CCI 550 primer or a Winchester Small Pistol Magnum Primer. With a 125 gr bullet I load 21.3 gr powder. I load 15.8 gr powder under 158 gr bullets.

44Caliber

June 28, 2007, 07:04 PM

Are Hodgdon 110 and Winchester 296 the exact same powder?

I have both on the workbench they both appear to be ball powders and identical but I am not sure. I emailed Hodgdon but have not received an answer.

44caliber:)

ArchAngelCD

June 28, 2007, 07:21 PM

Are Hodgdon 110 and Winchester 296 the exact same powder?

I have both on the workbench they both appear to be ball powders and identical but I am not sure. I emailed Hodgdon but have not received an answer.
I wrote Winchester Powder to complain about the lack of loading data on their site for W231. I got an email back telling me to go to the Hodgdon load data site and use the HP-38 data for W231 in exact amounts. I would say they are exactly the same powders since they would never tell me that in today’s lawyer driven environment. I guess since Hodgdon bought Winchester Powders they are now exactly the same powders instead of just being close to the same. I later asked them about W296 and H110 and was told I could substitute the numbers for each. Just go to the Hodgdon load data site and you will see the numbers for each powder are now exactly the same. http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp I'm guessing the IMR powders are going to be the same too since Hodgdon also owns them. You will see on the link above they supply load data for all 3 powders.

44Caliber

June 28, 2007, 08:42 PM

As you can see, I'm trying to consolidate my powders. If I can use one powder for 357 magnum, 44 magnum, and 500 magnum using different charges for each caliber and bullet weight, I would be golden

44Caliber

tbtrout

June 28, 2007, 10:24 PM

I use 296 for both 357 and 44. I do not know about 500

ArchAngelCD

June 29, 2007, 12:30 AM

44Caliber,
Both the Hodgdon site and the Winchester site recommend their H110 or W296 powder for Magnum handgun loads.
H110™ H110 is the spherical powder that screams "no wimps, please!" It delivers top velocities with top accuracy in the 44 Magnum, 454 Casull and the 475 Linebaugh. Silhouette shooters claim it is the most accurate 44 powder they have ever used. In addition, H110 is "the" choice for miniscule 410 Bore shotgun. It handles all 2 1/2", 1/2 oz. loads, as well as all 11/16 oz. loads for the 3" version. Available in 1 lb., 4 lb. & 8 lb. containers.
296™ This propellant was developed for Winchester factory loaded ammunition for 357 magnum, 44 magnum and 410 bore. Its high loading density provides optimal velocity. 296 is widely accepted as the standard for 410 bore shotshell. However, 296 is not suitable for most rifle cartridges.
I would say you won't need to worry about stocking more than 1 powder for your Magnum handgun needs.

As a matter of fact, H110 will achieve much higher velocities in a .44 Magnum round than HS-6, HS-7 or Universal with considerably lower pressures. Also, it seems to be the best choice along with Lil'Gun for the S&W 500 Magnum too. It develops less pressure and more velocity with the .500 Magnum especially with bullets 400 gr or lighter. (according to the Hodgdon load data site.) http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

Clark

June 30, 2007, 01:44 AM

The fact that H110 and W296 come from the same place and are nearly the same product is established.

What I have not found is the specifications for each blend.

Knowing the way Hodgdon operated back when they started re-selling H110, it was not a question of Hodgdon writing a specification for H110, but more Hodgdon asking their source how much they wanted for that other stuff on the truck.

So it would come down to amateurs finding out what the consistance is from lot to lot of H110 and W296.
Are they always consistent to within 1%?
Are they consistent to each other with in 1%?

I have both powders, but do not use them in a way that causes the brass to yield [other than 7.62x39mm], so I don't know if they are really the same.

But with all the lot numbers and cans of each I have, I suppose I could measure the speed of the powder in a .223.

Grumulkin

June 30, 2007, 08:55 AM

Are Hodgdon 110 and Winchester 296 the exact same powder?

They are exactly the same powder. I have e-mailed Hodgdon about this and they confirmed that they are the same powder. H414 is also the same as Winchester 760. Further confirmation of these facts can also be had by perusing the 2007 issue of Hodgdon's reloading magazine. The loads, pressures, velocities for H110/Win. 296 and H414/Win. 760 are always EXACTLY the same where ever both powders are listed.

H110 is also usually a little cheaper than Win. 296.

44Caliber

June 30, 2007, 02:17 PM

Thanks for the information.
If you review the data, ballistics, loading tables, the look and feel of the two powders plus the fact that Winchester now appears on Hodgdon web page: conclusion they are the same powder with different names.

44Caliber

JA

June 30, 2007, 06:30 PM

I have been using 296 since 1976 and have only used data from Winchester.
Over the years the max load with a 125 grain bullet has gone from 21 grains down to 18.5 grains and is now back up to 21 grains. Both my S&W model 28's with 6" barrels shot across a Chrony give 1630fps average. Flames fly out the cylinder gap about a foot and two feet out the barrel.
So a 2" barrel should put on a real light show.

Bullet

July 1, 2007, 02:34 AM

Hawk
Hunh. I recently started a thread wondering what one does when one manual's minimum load was higher than another's manual's maximum load and the powder manufacturer warns against going below published minimums.

I believe there may be other differences in the load data, like different bullets and different OAL’s and different barrels or guns used in the testing. I’ve found Speers data to be real close to what I get using Gold Dots. You can’t use only part of the data for a comparison.